Why Net Neutrality Matters

August 9, 2011 | by

Few aspects of internet policy are more hotly debated than net neutrality. The Open Society Media Program’s new reference paper "Net Neutrality and the Media" provides an illuminating guide to this complex topic. Here, author Stefaan Verhulst explains why net neutrality matters.

In its 30 years of existence, the internet has transformed the way we access information, connect with others, form opinions, and make decisions. Most observers would attribute the internet’s success to its end-to-end architecture—a principle by which every package of information is delivered in a “neutral” manner, without discrimination or preferential treatment. According to this principle, data produced by an individual blogger or small independent media outlet is routed the same way as data produced by major news outlets and media sites. Many argue that it is this fundamentally democratic principle that is at the root of the tremendous innovation and creativity spurred by the internet.

In recent years, the tremendous growth of data on the internet—paradoxically, one of the main indicators of the network’s success—has spurred a vigorous debate over whether the end-to-end design principle should be replaced by a system that allows for the prioritization or blocking of certain forms of traffic. The outcome of this debate has the potential to determine whether or not the internet will remain free, open, and accessible.

As with all complex issues, there are many actors, interests, and points of view involved in this discussion. Many network providers oppose net neutrality, arguing that it thwarts their freedom to experiment with new business models, removes any incentive to upgrade existing infrastructure, and impinges upon their property rights. Law enforcement agencies similarly advocate traffic management approaches—such as deep-packet inspection—to allow for better preventing and policing of cybercrime and security attacks.

On the other hand, internet freedom advocates are calling for policy and regulatory interventions to guarantee that carriers continue to treat all packages equally, without “tiering” access. They argue that this is far more than an arcane technical discussion: the internet’s potential to spur and strengthen democracy, innovation, and freedom of expression are at stake.

My reference paper provides an introduction to the network neutrality debate, and to the various issues and actors involved. It presents a brief explanation of network neutrality as a principle, and then explains how and why that principle has come to be questioned in recent years. Throughout, it attempts to explain the important social, economic, and political issues embedded in what might otherwise appear to be merely a debate over technical policymaking.

Where do you stand on the net neutrality debate?

Heart valves implanted without open-heart surgery.

NewsRx Health January 25, 2009 An innovative approach for implanting a new aortic heart valve without open-heart surgery is being offered to patients at NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital/Columbia University Medical Center. Known as the PARTNER (Placement of AoRTic traNscathetER valves) trial, this Phase 3 multicenter study is being led by national co-principal investigators Dr. Martin Leon and Dr. Craig Smith and is focused on the treatment of patients who are at high risk or not suitable for open-heart valve replacement surgery. openheartsurgerynow.net open heart surgery

The Edwards SAPIEN transcatheter heart valve, made of bovine pericardial tissue leaflets hand-sewn onto a metal frame, is implanted via one of two catheter-based methods -- either navigated to the heart from the femoral artery in the patient's leg, or through a small incision between the ribs and into the left ventricle. It is then positioned inside the patient's existing valve, using a balloon to deploy the frame, which holds the artificial valve in place. Both procedures are performed on a beating heart, without the need for cardiopulmonary bypass and its associated risks.

"This breakthrough technology could save the lives of thousands of patients with heart valve disease who have no other therapeutic options," says Dr. Leon, the study's national co-principal investigator, associate director of the Cardiovascular Interventional Therapy (CIVT) Program at NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital and Columbia University Medical Center, and professor of medicine at Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons.

Annually, some 200,000 people in the U.S. need a new heart valve, but nearly half of them do not receive a new valve for a variety of reasons.

"This study may show that transcatheter valve replacement is a safe and effective alternative to open surgery, which remains the 'gold standard' for most patients," says Dr. Smith, study co-principal investigator, interim surgeon-in-chief and chief of cardiothoracic surgery at NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital/Columbia University Medical Center, and the Calvin F. Barber Professor of Surgery at Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons. see here open heart surgery

The transcatheter valve procedures take about 90 minutes, compared with four to six hours for open-heart surgery. In open-heart surgery, the surgeon cuts through the breastbone, stops the heart, removes the valve and replaces it. Open-heart surgery can require a two- to three-month recovery period, compared to only a few days for the transcatheter approach.

The PARTNER trial is a prospective randomized study with two separate treatment arms. In the surgical arm, patients are randomized to receive either the Edwards SAPIEN transcatheter heart valve or an Edwards surgical valve via open-heart surgery. In the non-surgical, medical management arm, patients considered to be non-operative are randomized to receive either the Edwards SAPIEN transcatheter heart valve or appropriate medical therapy.

One Comment to “Why Net Neutrality Matters”

  1. On August 17th, 2011 at 4:59 am, Maria Lundberg said:

    why net neutrality matters it´s importent so we can go on resolve problems with none private involved discussion.
    try to keep it diplomatic,
    why you did that or that, the more facts in the case, will run the net neutrality. often the media make a mess too, more harm than help.
    the power today is to run people and it´s difficult to get heard, the police states taking over us simple people small matters, as we where allowed to take care of selves before.
    where are we................and what do we tell the new generation no jobs, blame your selves the new politic......................something to think about thanks/Maria Lundberg

Leave a Comment

Comments are moderated and may not appear immediately.
See our Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy

Search the Blog

Author

Stefaan Verhulst

Stefaan Verhulst is Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Comparative Communications, Stanhope Centre, London School of Economics.

Follow Stefaan

Stefaan's Posts

About this Blog

The Open Society Foundations work to improve the lives of the world's most vulnerable people and to promote human rights, justice, and accountability. This blog aims to bring that work a little closer by giving our experts and grantees a platform to reflect on their issues, sharpen their thinking, and engage in a conversation on how to advance open society values around the globe.

Archives

  • Email Newsletters Stay Informed

Sign up for news from the Open Society Foundations.